Hirohito's over 60 years rein of Japan in the past century covers the two subjects that keep knocking my mind: war and piece, postwar economic miracle.

Is the emperor responsible for the war? Despite Chief Prosecutor Keenan's pronouncement that the emperor will not be called before the court and his demise in 1989, this question worths digging in because it provides one of the most important, if not the most important of the perspective of Japan as a state and a nation, more specifically the relationship between the emperor and Japanese people.

The question can be explored in two sub-questions: the emperor's ability to affect the war and peace decision and his intention on that.

After 1945 surrender, the emperor himself and conservatists claimed repeatedly that the emperor as a constitutional monarchy is totally groundless and politically driven. The Meiji Constitution established a dual system where the elected cabinet holds the authority over domestic affairs while the ultimate military decision resides with the emperor and the emperor only. Further, May 15 Incident (1932) in which the then prime minister was ssisinated by military terrorism abolished the party politics and established the emperor's overall absolute power at least superficially. However this can work both way. In the September 18 incident, the emperor failed to punish the military who staged such a serious incident without his knowledge, which made the emperor worry whether he would be taken seriously by the military thereafter. This concern could be strengthened after the military took a further step to abolish the party government. Even though it could be partially true, the emperor admitted that "If I had gone against the advocates of war, the public would no doubt have thought that we were surrendering to US when our army and navy had superior forces and a coup would have been staged. " This linked the second question: his intention on war and peace decision and the motives behind that.

The emperor was not strenuously opposed the war or even for the war with China as in his eyes there was little chance that Japan could lose, in which case his throne and emperor system could be threatened. His focus was more on strengthening his absolute power as a living God and ensuring that the ever growing military power in Japan was not out of control. This was exactly why he was annoyed after the September 18 incident. Thus, it will be more interesting to look the emperor's complicated intention at some critical moments during the war against US and England which the emperor believed that there was only 50 % chance to win if not lower. The emperor endorsed the war in a situation which he thought not going to war would 100% lead to an overall defeat. The oil embargo quickly deteriorated the national economy which was by then already half dried up by the war with Asian countries and not too long the warships and planes that Japan long took pride in would become rubbish without oil supply. On the other hand, he was afraid his opposition could trigger a coup with the "fight until death" emotion prevailed across the country. In both situations, his throne would be in trouble. So why not give it a try? The emperor was trying the luck  for his selfish purpose by pushing the entire nation into the hell. Like all autarchy in the long history of human beings, the emperor valued his destiny more than the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese people. In the desperate stage of the war, the emperor apparently openly encourages anything that could give US a blow in order to negotiate a peace including suicide attacks. To avoid a surrender, the emperor was even willing to give southern akhalin and Manchuria to the Soviet Union in exchange for supplying Japan with oil. When the time came that the only way out was surrender, the emperor's top priority was still how to defend the emperor system.

Shockingly, after the noble decision to surrender, no hatred was found in oridnary Japanese who sacrifice everything for the emperor. An old man cried out in despair "This is stupid. If the war could be stopped by the emperor simply raising his hands and surrendering, why didn't he end the war sooner for us?" The logic behind is we Japanese are ready for death for you but your noble decision makes all the sacrifice made meaningless.

It was completely increditable that Japanese peole stayed irrelvelant when the big secret was released that their emperor handed over Okinawa to US in exchange for his name being excluded from the Tokyo war crime trial.

The support for the emperor could fall a little bit during the high inflation and extreme shortage of food period right after the war with the lefist and communist gained remarkable popularity among the starving Japanese. However, the emperor quickly regained his popularity by conducting the country tour, meeting people who never believe their living god would be in places like a mine. However, the tour was initiated by GHQ and the purpose was to take advantage of the emperor's impact to smooth their occupation. As a reward, the GHQ agreed that the emperor system be retained.

All were nothing but deals. The emperor successfully saved himself from the hang stage by riding on people's will (people's support to him as the emperor) as a shield. Now we know "100 million people repenting together" is just one out of a package o strategies of defending the emperor system. The emperor should also thank God for the Cold War coming at the right time which made he and his loyal people more valuable to US occupiers.

My feeling about Japanese people's loyalty to the emperor is a complex. I do not deny sometimes I am even moved by amazing stories like Onoda's return from jungle almost 20 years after the surrender. He refused to put down guns unless he got the command from this superior. He kept fighting as a one-man Japanese army. That question that haunted China and other Asian nations was whether this kind of absoluate loyalty and power might be revived which could potentially pull the region into another war disaster.

The answer from younger generations give us some relief. When asked why they signed up the memorial register at the imperial palace when the emperor lay ill, they replied " I might by chance appear on TV". Further asked if the emperor system is necessary, the answer was somewhat brilliant "It's not necessary to get rid of it."

Conclusion. The emperor was responsible for the war as he got the enough if not absolute power over the war/peace decision and his intention to go to war for the selfish purpose of defending the emperor system. Hence, the emperor should not only be punished by the international community but also be overthrown by Japanese people. Just as the UK paper put it after his death, "there is a place reserved for him in the hell."

The author of "The Age of Hirohito" claimed that "The greatest paradox of Showa political history resides in the fact that the emperor who had the absolute support of the Japanese people did not use people’s power. Instead, he as manipulated by a small group of militarist and bureaucrats all the while." The author actually shares the same base as mine that assuming the emperor firmly believed that in no event he would be overthrown, it would be more likely that he embraced peace. The point here is not whether the emperor had the absolute support or not but whether the emperor believed so or not. Apparently and unfortunately, the emperor was in constant fear that he could be overthrown.  I would say that this fear which resided with every and one emperor in any autarchies is one of the fundemental driver of most wars and other disasters in human history.

As a freethinker, religion is alway like a remote myth to me. What amazes me is among those greatest scientists, most are true believers of God no matter it is Christian, Jewish or Islamic. Further, in Einstein's eyes, only those who devote their life to the searching for the principles of the nature without a single definite purpose are ture God followers as  there is no other incentive strong enough behind all the lonely effort made except for the obsessment with the greatness of the nature which cannot be created by anything else but God.

Einstein argues that religion should hold a place in today's technology advanced world however it is being treated in an inproper if not a wrong way unfortunately. First, it should not come with fear as most of its ordinary followers understand that they forgive and they help in order not to be punished when they get to heaven. Second it is not religion's advantage to tell "what it is" which is a job of science indeed; nor should it go too far on the guideline of daily life practice. Yet the increasingly powerful science and technology as its application does not have an answer to "what should it be" which is place reserved for religion, it other words, the ultimate value of human beings, of life. In this respect, I sincerely admire those non-free thinkers as I am from time to time puzzled by questions like why work, why love, what for, etc.

Back to The Koran, the holy book of Isam, a religion followed by more than 1.3 billion people worldwide.  Unlike the other two major religions, Isam has a mixed image or sometimes even negative due to political reasons. 911 is an event that makes this known to the whole world however the power center such as CIA, US became so concerned about it since as early as 1960s partly because among those populous Muslim nations, many are undeveloped yet hold huge valuable natural resources like oil. In the book " the confession of an EHM", the author revealed his experience that once in rural event he was stunned by a group of Indonisians "your true enemy is us as communists do not really have a belief in that and we muslim are ready to die for Isam, you fully understand this."

Extremism derived from Isam is an increasing concern to outsiders as even Muslims themselves cannot deny the fact that if you pull out a world map, almost all the violent places are dwelled by followers of this religion. Scholars try to explain this phenomenon by referring to the holy Koran that in certain verses God provokes fighting. The difficulty with all religious documents is the vagueness. Worse, in Isamic world, there is no central authority that gives an universe explaination on what god really means. The documantry I watched did not explain why it is so but my observation is that might be related to its origin. As depicted in the documentary, the prophet preached that communication with God is no longer necessary through certain people or object. As a result of direct communication with God individually, different understanding of the holy Koran is inevitable.

One interesting point about the Koran is that it actually mentions the existance of Christianity and Jew. More amazingly, it said the revelations that the prophet received from God is the SAME as those received by prophets that created two other religions. The reason why God bothers to reveal again is that unfortunately the revelations that are passed on in Christianity and Jew are distorted.

The difficulty of my relationship with him is that, with effort of all my rationalness, the lack of incentive to strive for improvement between us lies in the very beginning when a man like  him is not fit for a life of mine which constantly questions the existing and pursues something like an ultimate value.

However, I am so much convinced that in the world of relationship emotion prevails whenever time comes for a decision. Hence, I cannot but leave myself in the black and wait for what is going to happen on me that will eventually trigger an emotion that says if I am pro or against this relationship.

I never deny even to myself I am in deep love of him. As such, I am concerned about the wording here in case he happened to see although it is so clear and certain that a man like him will never takes even a glance at a blog.

Being with collective sale for about four months. After the first sight amazement, puzzle and headache, a relook helps me to list the key components in a way that makes more practical sense.

Q1: what kind of land has enbloc potential?

A1: two easy things to check 1) higher land value (meaning can develop more sellable space) 2)sufficient gap between the existing and neighboring new development sale price.

Q2: what are sensitive issue?

A2: two things 1) reserve price, relatively easy as it is fundementally market driven 2) apportionment method, real challenge here, especially mixed developments.

My consideration as the possbile best way is first engage valuation and out of the reserve price, give owners back what they can get if sold individually first. Then, the rest of the reserve price, or so called premium which is derived from the land value should be splited strictly by floor area. The reason is simple the land that your unit occupies has nothing different from his except the size.

Q3: how to help owners with their own decision?

A3: Again two groups. 1) investors, relatively easy, a pure financial decision, can work out scenarios that compare enbloc with individual sale at different disposal time, can also talk from a overall portfolio management point of view 2) occupiers, hard, as accomodation needs prevail and there is no so such effective market that you can sell high and buy low at the same time. The answer to this is stil open.

Q4: Is the current process (initiated by a small volunteer group) legitimate?

A5: It is in line with the democracy principles. Owners will always question the legitimacy of a small group of volunteers owners with no representation of the rest can initiate the whole process including such important issues such as shortlisting consultants and lawyers?
Ok, let's take a look at the US Presidential Election which is widely regarded as the benchmark of democracy. Politicians or activists funded by corporations or other organizations come up with their proposal and with the help of the funders they market it, advertise it, try to sell it to as many as possible. There are few proposals around and at the end of the day, the mass population vote to decide which one they would like to go with.
You can see the similarity here. Activists, funding needed to facilite the whole process, mass voting and at last some beneifits go to the funders that have long risked their upfront money and effort put in.

方枪枪就是我。开始的时候死活不肯上幼儿园，入了园，瞅着人家小朋友都有小红花，那个羡慕，对着评比表眼睛眨巴眨巴的，好吧，我早上起来按时拉屎，我自己洗手，我还憋着尿学自己脱衣服，我是好孩子，可是怎么还没有小红花呢？呜呜，我不玩了，什么呀，我尿床，我脱女孩子的裤子，我还打架，没完呢，我还造了老师的谣！哈哈哈哈。。。不为了什么，就为了这二十多年前的自己，可以从心里笑出来，真的，小胳膊，小腿的一伸一驰看上去都那么美。

有记忆前的自己是什么样？有自己以前的爸爸妈妈是什么样？没有穿越时光的地铁，也不可能站在第三者角度看自己。

问：如果天平的一端是爸爸妈妈的幸福，另一端是自己爱的人的幸福，该选哪一端？答：父母不会跟孩子要幸福，选择你爱的人吧。